Finally, a non-boring filibuster-related idea: The fight over the Senate filibuster rules has been one of the dullest and most bogus in recent memory, with commentators on both sides shamelessly parroting arguments that they would scoff at if the partisan balance in the Senate were reversed.
However, Mickey Kaus says something interesting today in regard to the new compromise resolution:
 
Why,         after all, are so many people in Washington attached to the Senate's         "right to unlimited debate"? Is it because the         filibuster--which effectively requires a supermajority to pass anything         through the Senate-- guarantees "freedom of speech, freedom of         debate and freedom to dissent in the United States Senate." (Sen.         Byrd's modest version.) Or is it because the filibuster, and the         exaggerated power it gives to both minorities and individuals, is the         basis for much of the Senate's--indeed Washington's--corrupt cash         economy? Without the filibuster, after all, senators in the minority         party wouldn't be nearly as big a deal. They couldn't block         legislation--so lobbyists wouldn't need to bribe them with campaign         contributions. And honest, self-protective corporations wouldn't have to         pay so many of these lobbyists to bribe them with campaign         contributions.
       
        Even most majority party senators would see some of their power drain         away if the Senate became more like the House, organized efficiently         along party lines so the majority could exercise its non-filibusterable         power. Individual majority senators would be less like princes to be         wined, dined and fawned over and more like party backbenchers.         Corporations and interest groups wouldn't need to spend a lot of money         bribing them either. And why would Boeing and GM want to pay for an army         of ex-Senate aides to sweet-talk all 55 Republicans when one aide with         the ear of Bill Frist would get the job done? ...
Still, I'm not sure it is so awful that there's more waste involved in influencing the Senate than there is in influencing the House, where all you need to do is pay off Tom DeLay.
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
 
 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 
 
 
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment